"The Dark Knight Rises" Review--No Spoilers

"The Dark Knight Rises" is a massive film; an epic saga on a scale not seen in an American film since "Avatar." (Note that I'm purely talking scale here. I detest "Avatar" but there's no denying that it's a massive film). Ever since Batman rode into the night at the end of the masterpiece that is "The Dark Knight" I'd been eagerly awaiting director/co-writer/co-producer Christopher Nolan's followup, and when it was revealed that this film would be the definitive conclusion to his "The Dark Knight Trilogy" that made my anticipation even greater. And while there's no doubt that Nolan and company have delivered a film that is much bigger and with much more at stake than the previous two entries, unfortunately the film gets bogged down in a few too many characters, which along with some plot holes (albeit relatively minor ones) and just plain lazy filmmaking decisions place this film a few steps down from the mastery that was its predecessor.

"The Dark Knight Rises" is by far the biggest, most brash superhero movie to ever come along. Yes "The Avengers" was big in terms of its scope, but its lighthearted tone made it feel as if nothing was really at stake. That is far from the case here; not only is this by far the most violent of Nolan's Batman films, but a palpable sense of gloom hangs over much of the film. Despair and tragedy beget more of the same, eventually leading to imagery reminiscent of World War II Nazi ghettos. This is a dark film, but it's because of that darkness that I felt more invested in this film than I ever did during "The Avengers," as the Gotham City of this film is a truly violent, anarchic world.

The performances are generally solid, though there's nothing approaching Heath Ledger's revelatory, Oscar-winning turn as the Joker in "The Dark Knight." I don't think Christian Bale has been given due credit for his performance as Bruce Wayne / Batman in these films. This is a brooding character whose life has been shattered by tragedy numerous times, a man whose commitment to his version of justice has led him to darker and darker places, culminating in his climactic decision at the conclusion of "The Dark Knight." And Bale simply captures every nuance of this character. I will say that he's given more range in this film than he was in the previous film, and his performance both with and without the cape and cowl is fantastic. Michael Caine gives his most emotional performance as Alfred; he is simply a master actor and it shows. Gary Oldman is also reliably solid as the dutiful but world-weary Commissioner Gordon, who now has to carry the weight of his decision to go along with the cover-up of Harvey Dent's crimes at the end of "The Dark Knight." Morgan Freeman is his reliable self, though his Lucius Fox gets fewer playful moments than in the previous two outings.

There are several new additions to the cast, and most fare reasonably well. Tom Hardy has the unenviable task of having to follow up Ledger's maniacal performance as the film's lead villain. I think Nolan and his brother Jonathan (who co-wrote the script with the director) were wise to take the villain in a completely different direction than Ledger's Joker. Bane is a hulking, masked presence, and while the vocal decisions for the character are at least peculiar, Hardy definitely gives the character his all. His eyes are extremely powerful in key scenes, but I would say he doesn't rise to the level of all time great masked performances (Hugo Weaving in "V for Vendetta" comes to mind for me in that realm). Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Marion Cotillard also join the cast in roles that may or may not come from the comic source material. Someone with better knowledge of the comics will know whether they are original characters or not, but they both do well. Cotillard is her generally lovely self, though this role demands less of her than her performance in Nolan's previous film, "Inception" (an Oscar-worthy performance from her in my opinion). Gordon-Levitt is quickly becoming one of Hollywood's most talented young actors, and his performance as idealistic cop John Blake is simply excellent. The best new arrival, however, is Anne Hathaway as burglar / femme fatale Selina Kyle. I think Hathaway is seriously underrated as an actress (though she does have an Oscar nomination), and she absolutely owns this role. She's brash, confident, and utterly sexy on the surface, but she clearly hides a shady past and that shines through in some of the film's darker moments. Hathaway has some of the most expressive eyes in Hollywood, and the sorrow and doubt in her face in key scenes is palpable. But she also perfectly captures the playfulness of the character, and in many ways is a breath of fresh air in this dark film.

In terms of the direction, Nolan is simply a master craftsman and probably the best working in mainstream Hollywood today. "The Dark Knight Rises" will likely serve as a textbook example of modern epic filmmaking (yes it's epic by today's standards, but "Ben-Hur" or "Lawrence of Arabia" it is not). Nolan takes the time to introduce all the plotlines and characters (both of which are probably a few too many), and truly invests in the story as he builds to the inevitable climax. The film certainly is visually spectacular; Nolan's decision to continue shooting on film (a mix of wide angle 35 mm and 70mm IMAX, which is cropped to widescreen for traditional presentations) gives the film a warmth and lifelikeness that digital cinematography simply can't match. The production values are immaculate, and Hans Zimmer once again provides a thunderous score, complete with a few new themes (Zimmer goes solo on his final Batman outing after collaborating with James Newton Howard on the first two installments).

Now, with all this said, the film does have some flaws. I mentioned the excess of supporting characters and plotlines; these become hard to follow in the film's opening act, though repeat viewings could amend this. However, the film does suffer from a few plot holes and things that just plain don't make sense. I'm willing to overlook small plotholes if the overall film is great (such was the case with "The Dark Knight" which, while I do consider it a masterpiece, is not a perfect film). But the plot holes and unexplained instances here are much more obvious, even to the point that I was getting close to checking out of the film during its first act. There are also some pacing and editing issues that could have used some tightening up in the first act as well. But thankfully, things settle down for the most part as the film progresses.

One other criticism I have concerns the film's tone, and while it may not be completely fair, it's just how I feel. "Batman Begins" was the first comic book-inspired film to truly try and ground things in reality, and Nolan followed it up with "The Dark Knight," which, in terms of tone, I do not consider a comic book film at all. It is simply an epic crime saga populated by a couple of eccentric costumed characters, and its tone is completely, utterly realistic. "The Dark Knight Rises" definitely has an apocalyptic feel, but it also has that sci-fi, comic book sensibility in some instances (not least from the script, which is not nearly as crisp as "The Dark Knight"). Maybe Nolan just wanted each film to have its own tone, and like I said it may not be fair to fault him for that, but after the completely serious tone of "The Dark Knight" I was expecting something similar.

So overall, "The Dark Knight Rises" is a satisfying conclusion to "The Dark Knight Trilogy." Nolan and his team have pulled out all the stops to deliver a truly massive, epic event film. It has more flaws than its predecessor, and is certainly no masterpiece, but it's a solid conclusion to one of film's finest trilogies.

"The Dark Knight Rises" is rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action, some sensuality, and language.
Running time: 164 minutes.
Released domestically on July 20, 2012, by Warner Bros. Pictures.
3.5 stars out of 4.

Capsule Reviews for March and April 2012 Films

I've fallen a little behind on my reviews lately, but with the summer movie season about to kick off this Friday with "The Avengers" I wanted to get caught up on the films I've seen over the last couple months, but haven't reviewed. As the headline indicates, these will be brief reviews as I have six films to cover.


Project X (R, 88 minutes, March 2, 2012, Warner Bros. Pictures)

This "found footage-style" comedy centers on a group of high schoolers who plan the ultimate party to up their social standing at their school. All sorts of mayhem ensues, some of which is very funny, but ultimately this feels like a series of comic vignettes rather than a cohesive whole. The three main characters (played by Thomas Mann, Oliver Cooper, and Jonathan Daniel Brown) don't really evolve or develop over the course of the film, leaving it to function as nothing more than a mildly amusing diversion.  One potential issue with this film is the argument that high school kids will want to emulate the antics of the characters, but I personally think anyone who actually thinks that this scenario could happen in real life without serious consequences is pretty thick in the head. This film is meant as a comic diversion, and that's really all it is. 2 stars out of 4.


Jeff Who Lives at Home (R, 83 minutes, March 9, 2012, Paramount Vantage)

This indie comedy / drama from writer / director brothers Jay and Mark Duplass ("Cyrus," "Baghead," "The Puffy Chair") is a simple little film that isn't all that complex thematically, but is still funny and moving. It centers on thirty-something Jeff (Jason Segel), who still lives with his mother (Susan Sarandon). When she sends him out on search of some wood glue to fix a broken shutter, his life changes over the course of a single day. The story here is barely enough for a full-length feature, as the film runs just over 80 minutes, and there's a subplot involving Sarandon's character that I felt really added nothing thematically. Segel continues to play basically the same character in every film (the one exception being 2009 comedy "I Love You Man"), but Ed Helms really shines here as Jeff's brother Pat. This is easily the best performance I've seen from Helms, and it's one that proves he may have a career outside of "The Office" and the "Hangover" franchise...or even outside of comedy altogether, for that matter. The beautiful Judy Greer, who was excellent in a small role in last year's best film, "The Descendants," is even better here, and I really look forward to seeing more from her. 3 stars out of 4.


Salmon Fishing in the Yemen (PG-13, 107 minutes, March 9, 2012, CBS Films)

This indie drama has been heavily marketed in independent film circles for the last six months or so, and as it features two very talented actors in Ewan McGregor and Emily Blunt, I had to give it a shot. I feel like the potential was there for this story (which is based on the book by Paul Torday) to be a good film, and maybe even a great one. Unfortunately, the script from Simon Beaufoy ("Slumdog Millionaire," "127 Hours") isn't particularly written in places, has an unnecessarily subplot involving Islamic extremists, and, above all else, the ending is dreadful. Not the resolution necessarily, but the whole final act, where at least three different possible endings are dangled in front of you, only to have things move on to something else. By the time the resolution finally comes, I was so fed up with the whole thing that I didn't care what happened, and it didn't help that one aspect of the ending felt horribly contrived. McGregor and Blunt do have great chemistry, and I did find myself really caring about the characters, at least up until that final act. Amr Waked gives a great performance as a wealthy sheikh who wants to introduce the Scottish sport of salmon fishing into a river in Yemen. This is a film that could have been good, but ends up getting too bogged down in cheap storytelling. 2 stars out of 4.


21 Jump Street (R, 109 minutes, March 16, 2012, Columbia Pictures)

This big screen adaptation of the 1980s T.V. series starring Johnny Depp did exactly what it needed to with its goofy premise: turned it into a ridiculous comedy. Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum star as young police officers who, due to their youthful appearances, go undercover in a local high school in an attempt to break up an emerging drug ring. Unlike "Project X," this film plays like a complete narrative, and the action / comedy elements are much more effective. Hill has always had great comic timing, but Tatum does much better here than in the seemingly endless list of romantic dramas he's been in; perhaps he has a better acting future in comedy. Dave Franco (younger brother of James) gives a great performance as the head of the high school drug ring; Ellie Kemper (Erin from "The Office") is largely wasted in a useless subplot. 3 stars out of 4.


The Cabin in the Woods (R, 95 minutes, April 13, 2012, Lionsgate)

 This deconstructionist horror comedy written by Joss Whedon and Drew Goddard (who also directed), is particularly difficult to review, because I don't want to spoil any of the film's twists. Suffice to say that what starts out as a relatively standard horror setup (a group of college-aged friends head to a cabin in the middle of nowhere for the weekend) turns into something much more complex. The slasher elements are there, and while the film is never scary, one particular scene involving a mounted wolf's head is incredibly suspenseful. But elements of science fiction and even fantasy are introduced as the story evolved into an increasingly bizarre deconstruction and parody of the entire horror genre. The only recognizable actor among the leads is Chris Hemsworth ("Thor"), but Kristin Connolly does a great job as the main character, and Fran Kranz steals every scene the stereotypical, stoned-out-of-his-mind pothead. This is easily the most quotable film of the year so far, and many of the gems in the dialogue belong to Kranz. I will say that by the end of the film, I was really rooting for the surviving characters to make it out of their situation, and would even go as far as to say I cared about them, which is extremely rare for a horror film. This is a high concept genre film that satirizes and sends up its own genre, so it's hard for me to know who will like it. But if you go into it with an open mind, and understand that you won't be getting what you expect, you'll hopefully have a blast. I know I did. 3 stars out of 4.


The Five-Year Engagement (R, 124 minutes, April 27, 2012, Universal Pictures)

This is a film I feel like I need to see again to fully appreciate. It's the rare film that's stayed with me even several days after seeing it, and I'm not sure yet if the good aspects of the story are just getting the better of me, or if this really is a true gem among romantic comedies that's just not being embraced because it's challenging. The title basically tells what the film is about, so I'll say that I really enjoyed Emily Blunt's performance as always, and while Jason Segel played another version of the same character yet again, it still works. Chris Pratt (NBC's "Parks and Recreation") and Alison Brie (NBC's "Community") steal every scene they're in, and the script from Segel and Nicholas Stoller (who also directed; this is the same team that made "Forgetting Sarah Marshall," a comedy favorite of mine), is generally good, though there are some pacing issues here and there and the ending is a tad cheesy. In fact, this film is at least as much drama as it is comedy, and it doesn't have the same gut-busting level of humor as most Judd Apatow productions, though there are some very funny moments. The challenging aspect of this film is its realism...these two characters are flawed people who make mistakes, and not just cookie-cutter movie plot mistakes that can be washed away. They feel like real, flawed human beings, and I absolutely loved that about them. The theme of this film is that no two people are perfect for each other, in fact probably no two people are even sixty percent perfect for each other. That's not a popular notion in today's world of fairy-tale romances, but the fact of the matter is that it's true. All you have to do is look at the divorce rate, in America and around the world, to see what happens when people place to high of a priority on someone else making them happy. The idea that people can love each other deeply, but still have to get through arguments and differences and changes is not a popular one, particularly among the escapist romantic comedy crowd, but it is a realistic one. In that respect, I think this film is much more challenging than most mainstream romantic comedies, but it's better for it. 3 stars out of 4.

"The Hunger Games" Review

I'm extremely surprised that "The Hunger Games" is as popular as it is, both in its novel and film forms. A big part of me wonders if people even understand what this story is about, because it is extremely dark and the social commentary is quite apparent. The fact that the book is considered a young adult novel, and that a large part of the fanbase seems to be teenagers and even preteens is downright disturbing on some levels, because the actual social and political themes here seem like they would go completely over their heads, leaving them to read the book and watch the film purely for entertainment. Perhaps I'm not giving enough credit to the series's fanbase (The Hunger Games the novel is the first of a trilogy; the film series will likely be at least four parts). But when all I heard leading up to the film's release were comparisons to the insipid dreck that is "Twilight"--complete with yet another teenage love triangle--I was quite surprised by how dark and incisive the story is. The society of this world created by author Suzanne Collins is one where, every year, twenty-four children are rounded up and forced to fight brutally to the death in a gladiatorial match that is compulsory television viewing for the entire population of this post-apocalypic North America known as Panem. This is a society of fascism at its highest order, but more specifically, this is a story about children being forced to slaughter other children for entertainment. So IF it's being read by today's children and viewed the same as the utterly empty and pointless drivel that is "Twilight," that would be just one of many possible sad commentaries on our society.

Okay, with that out of the way, I'll just concentrate on the film itself. I've already alluded to the plot, and given the number of people who have already seen the film during its opening weekend, it's probably pointless for me to outline it any more. The weakest link in the film is definitely the script. Adapted from the novel by Collins, director Gary Ross ("Seabiscuit," "Pleasantville"), and Billy Ray, it features no shortage of clunky dialogue. The developing romance bewteen Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) near the end of the film had me rolling my eyes, and the flashbacks to Gale (Liam Hemsworth), Katniss's suitor back home in District 12 just upped the cheese factor. I don't have a problem with romance in films, or even love triangles, but they have to be handled well, and this one just felt out of place; fortunately they don't dwell on it long. There's also some pretty heavy foreshadowing that takes away from the film's most intense emotional moment, which could have been even more powerful had it been handled with more subtlety. I'm sure there are things that make sense to those who have read the book (I haven't); Katniss's three-fingered salute in particular meant nothing to me, though it's a catalyst for one of the film's most powerful moments. That's not to say that the writing is all bad; much of it is handled quite well. I thought that many of the supporting tributes were characterized rather simplistically, but I was legitimately surprised and pleased by how the climax was handled. Overall the writing was a mixed bag for me; hopefully with the film's success a more competent screenwriter can be hired for the sequels (I've seen rumors that Simon Beaufoy, who won an Oscar for writing "Slumdog Millionaire" and was nominated again for "127 Hours" is being targeted).

Other than the dialogue issues though, the film is excellent. Lawrence is an incredibly talented young actress and she absolutely owns the film; she can do more with a look or a facial expression than many actors can do with several lines. That to me is the mark of a truly great actor and Lawrence (who was deservedly nominated for an Oscar for the indie drama "Winter's Bone," and gave one of the better performances in last year's superhero ensemble "X-Men: First Class") has a very bright future ahead of her. Headlining a franchise as big as this one looks to already be should give her her pick of projects from here on out. The supporting cast is filled with big names and they all do well; Woody Harrelson as Haymitch and Stanley Tucci as Caesar Flickerman stand out in particular, and I'm looking forward to where Donald Sutherland is going to take the character of President Snow, a man I already hate just because I know what he represents in this society. Hutcherson also gives a quality performance, but Hemsworth is barely around enough to matter.

Gary Ross seemed an odd choice as director for this project, but he does a great job. The film only dragged for me during the cave sequence near the end; other than that it moves along nicely and never really feels its nearly two-and-a-half hour length. Ross also does a great job of keeping the tension up, particularly during the Games themselves. His use of the ever tricky "shaky-cam" has been debated, but I think it generally worked, particularly in the action sequences (no doubt the frenetic camera movements helped mask the more brutal aspects of the violence, thus barely preserving the PG-13 rating). I could have done without the shaky-cam during the reaping scene; I guess the idea was to give a sense of documentary-style realism, but it felt odd to me. The overall look of the film is appropriately bleak, and James Newton Howard contributes an excellent, mostly restrained score that greatly adds to the mood of the picture. Some of the effects looked rather cheap (expected I guess given that the budget was only $80 million), but with the amount of money the film has made already, the budget will at least double for the sequels, which should help out in the effects department.

I was surprised by the level of violence; much was made of the fact that the filmmakers were required to deliver a PG-13 rating when the content is probably more deserving of an R. So I definitely wasn't expecting the level of blood and gruesomeness present here; it's about as close to an R as you could possibly get in my opinion, and I've seen less gruesome content (which also wasn't by and against children) earn an R. But what's more disturbing about the violence is that it is children killing other children, and a lot of it is extremely difficult to watch. The savagery is necessary though, to illustrate the brutal nature of this fascistic world; the Hunger Games were created as punishment for an attempted rebellion against the oppressive government seventy-four years prior. But if there's any question as to the story's themes, or the potential of what is to come, a denouement scene involving Seneca Crane (Wes Bentley), and in particular the final shot of the film, should leave little doubt.

"The Hunger Games" is rated PG-13 for intense violent thematic material and disturbing images--all involving teens.
Running time: 142 minutes.
Released domestically on March 23, 2012, by Lionsgate.
3 stars out of 4.

"John Carter" Review

"John Carter" is the film "Avatar" wishes it could have been. Those familiar with my cinematic opinions know that I'm not at all a fan of the highest grossing film of all time, and while I certainly don't mean to imply that "John Carter" is without flaws, in terms of epic sci-fi action adventure stories, it wipes the floor with that far more successful film. If you like "Avatar" (and it's clear that most of the developed world did), you probably won't like "John Carter," but if you didn't, at least consider that this film is a far better version of a (somewhat) similar story.

I only bring up "Avatar" because the basic conceits of the two films are quite similar: a human finds himself on another world and is drawn into a conflict to defend its people. "John Carter" is based on the Edgar Rice Burroughs novel A Princess of Mars, the first in a series of eleven sci-fi stories that James Cameron has cited as among the inspirations for "Avatar." George Lucas has also cited them as among the inspirations for the "Star Wars" series, so if you see things here similar to those films, at least know that this story came first.

The film is book-ended with scenes of a young Burroughs (Daryl Sabara), as he investigates the estate of his uncle, John Carter (Taylor Kitsch). The film then flashes back to 1868 where we meet Carter, a Civil War veteran who, through a series of events I won't spoil, finds himself transported to Mars (or "Barsoom," as the natives call it). Due to the weaker gravitational pull and lower atmospheric density, Carter finds himself capable of super-human strength and has the ability to leap great distances, which instantly makes him a coveted weapon to the three different peoples of Mars who are engaged in a brutal civil war of their own. He first meets the Tharks, a race of nine-foot-tall, four-armed, green beings led by Tars Tarkas (Willem Dafoe in a motion capture performance). He also meets the beautiful princess Dejah Thoris (Lynn Collins), who is expected to marry the leader of her peoples' enemies, Sab Than (Dominic West), with the hope that this reconciliation will bring peace. But she may also hold the key to Carter's return home.

I said that the film is not without flaws, and that's definitely true. Unlike the extremely predictable "Avatar," "John Carter" is occasionally hard to follow, what with the seemingly endless list of funny-sounding Martian names, different religions, mystical weapons, and dueling cities. The story definitely comes into focus about halfway through, but even after the film was over I still confused the names of the two lead villains, and still don't remember the name of their city (though the fact that it moves across the Martian landscape like a giant hovercraft was pretty cool). The story itself is practically as old as storytelling (a young warrior fights to defend the honor of a princess), but there are enough wrinkles to keep it from being too predictable. There are quite a few convenient moments, particularly in the final act, and some of the dialogue is undeniably clunky. The acting occasionally veers into melodramatic, particularly on the part of Collins, and Kitsch has no shortage of scenery chewing moments. Mark Strong is yet again typecast as emotionless villain Matai Shang; he almost looks bored at having to deliver another one-note performance. He's shown flashes of excellence in earlier roles in "Body of Lies" and "RockNRolla," and was Oscar-worthy in last year's "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy," but it really just feels like he's going through the motions here.

So that's the bad; what about the good? The good, and what makes me recommend "John Carter" unequivocally despite its flaws, is the sheer spectacle. Director Andrew Stanton makes his live-action debut with this film, following huge successes with Pixar's "Finding Nemo" and "Wall-E," and it's clear that he knows how to tell a story and deliver an immensely entertaining cinematic experience. The story may be as old as time, but as I said, the script (co-written by Stanton, Mark Andrews, and Michael Chabon), threw enough slight curve balls to keep me interested. You definitely care for these characters and what happens to them, which is a testament to the performances. Yes they're somewhat melodramatic in places, but Kitsch, and Collins in particular, do bring enough emotion that you're definitely rooting for them to end up together by the end of the film. I never know how to evaluate motion-capture performances, because it's really impossible to tell how much of the emotion in those characters comes from the actors and how much is rendered by the effects team. But Tars Tarkas is definitely a sympathetic (and quite multidimensional) character, as is fellow Thark Sola (Samantha Morton). The effects work all around is spectacular; the film had a much-reported $250 million budget, but it was definitely put to good use, as these aliens rival those from "District 9" in their realism and are really probably as well-done as the ultimate in motion capture characters, Gollum in "The Lord of the Rings." And while the effects are numerous, they never overwhelm the film, they merely serve it, as the best visual effects should do. There's also a refreshing absence of green screen work, as only a couple scenes looked like they were completely CGI environments, and Stanton is to be commended for using real sets and real locations that are eschewed by so many big-budget directors today.

There's also no shortage of spectacle and Stanton definitely has an acute visual eye for these action sequences, particularly one early in the film which involves Carter leaping through the air between several battling airships. This is also most definitely the goriest Disney film ever made, and though they get by on the "Lord of the Rings Rule" (as long as the blood isn't red, you can get a PG-13; such is the ludicrousness of the MPAA, but that's a topic for another day), but there is no shortage of blue Martian blood, along with much hacking, slashing, impaling, dismemberment, and decapitation. I refuse to see 3D versions of any film, but I've read that this one has received a particularly poor and useless post-conversion (it was shot on film with wide-angle lenses, the best format possible in my opinion but the worst for converting to 3D). So save the extra five dollars and see it in 2D.

Overall, "John Carter" is simply a big, entertaining, sci-fi spectacle. It has some flaws, but unless you get overwhelmed by the strange names and religions, you'll almost certainly have a good time. It's not particularly groundbreaking, but it has action, adventure, romance, and all sorts of alien creatures...in short, exactly what a sci-fi event film should be.

"John Carter" is rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and action.
Running time: 132 minutes.
Released domestically on March 9, 2012, by Walt Disney Pictures.
3 stars out of 4.

Top Ten Films of 2011

In my humble opinion, 2011 was not a great year for movies...I would actually say that it was nothing more than a decent year for movies. Even at this time last year, there just wasn't the same crop of appealing films that there was going into 2010, and even some of those that sounded appealing proved to be disappointments. Of course 2010 was a spectacular year for films, so maybe it was inevitable that there would be a dropoff. But while 2011 may have been a tad disappointing overall, there were some very good films released this year, and even a couple great ones. So, with that, I present my list of the top ten films of 2011.

I will say as a point of clarification that this list simply captures how I feel at this point in time, having now seen every critically acclaimed film that appealed to me released this past year. My feelings on some of these films may change over time...for example, while I have completed top ten lists for each of the last four years (2007-2010), I have gone back and retroactively changed my lists for two of those years, though my number one film has never changed (I also declared a number one film for 2006 despite not having a full top ten). That may be particularly important this year as I had a very hard time deciding which of my top two films was the best, but I'm confident that the film I chose will stand the test of time as my personal favorite of 2011.

And so without further ado, here is my list of the best films of 2011, beginning first with ten honorable mentions. These are films that particularly impressed me this year despite not being among the very best.

HONORABLE MENTION

 (IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER)

The Adjustment Bureau

This sci-fi / fantasy film based on a short story by Philip K. Dick presents a world where a secretive society of people make sure that things happen "according to plan." The story is a bit cheesy, and it's really more fantasy than sci-fi, but stars Matt Damon and Emily Blunt have incredible chemistry, and they're both such talented actors that they make the film work in spite of deficiencies in the story.

Anonymous

This film from director Roland Emmerich presents the theory that Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford (Rhys Ifans) was the true author of Shakespeare's plays. It's all a bit pulpy, with an abundance of political and sexual intrigue, but when viewed as a piece of historical fiction it's an immensely entertaining film, the likes of which (a lavish, big-budget period drama) that aren't really made anymore. And Ifans gives an absolutely titanic performance.  

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

Based on the book by Jonathan Safran Foer, this film tells the story of Oskar Schell (Thomas Horn), an eccentric young boy who lost his father on September 11. The ending is a bit cheesy, but overall it's simply an extremely well done emotional drama, and Horn gives a terrific performance.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2

The final film adaptation of J.K. Rowling's epic series of books is really just the extended climax of what is one four-and-a-half hour feature. But even as a standalone film, it's a spectacular action film with some of the best acting and emotion in the whole series.

The Help

When I reviewed this film back in September, I declared it the best film of the year at that time. My opinion on it has softened a bit since watching it a second time; while the execution is top-notch and there are probably close to ten excellent performances, some aspects of the ending (particularly the secret of Minnie's chocolate pie) feel a bit artificial, and while this film shows hints of the horror that blacks faced in the Jim Crow South, ultimately it feels a bit too sanitized to be considered a truly great achievement.     

Moneyball

This story of how Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) transformed the 2002 Oakland Athletics into contenders is a compelling sports drama. Pitt gives another great performance as he moves further and further away from the more populist action roles that defined his early career, and Jonah Hill is great is his first truly dramatic role. It's a very well-made film, but one that I didn't have a huge emotional reaction to overall.

Rango

This animated western from director Gore Verbinski (the original "Pirates of the Caribbean" trilogy) is filled with clever humor, fun action, and references to countless classic western films. The animation is spectacular and Johnny Depp is perfectly cast as the voice of the titular chameleon who must save the town of Dirt from an evil land baron (Ned Beatty)

Source Code

This small-scale, cerebral sci-fi thriller was released back in April, and it remains one of the year's most thought-provoking films. Other than Terrence Malick's "The Tree of Life," no film this year made me think more about its ending; in fact I was preoccupied with it for days after seeing the film and it wasn't until seeing it a second time that I became convinced I was interpreting it correctly. If you haven't seen this film, seek it out. It's excellent. 

Super 8

This sci-fi drama from director J.J. Abrams is very much in the spirit of such Steven Spielberg classics as "Close Encounters," "E.T.," and "The Goonies." It's the story of a group of kids who discover an alien presence in their town following a terrifying train crash. The child actors--led by Joel Courtney and Elle Fanning--are all terrific and Abrams continues his rise as one of the most prominent young directors out there.

The Tree of Life

No film this year was more anticipated among movie buffs, or discussed more afterwards, than Terrence Malick's "The Tree of Life." The simplest way to describe this FAR from simple film is that it's a meditation on life and the nature of the universe. It's definitely not everyone's cup of tea and I'm still not entirely sure what happens at the end, but it's a fascinating experience. 

And now for the cream of the crop, the top ten films of 2011:

10. YOUNG ADULT

This excellent black comedy from writer / director Jason Reitman centers on Mavis Gary (Charlize Theron), a thirtysomething woman who returns to her hometown determined to win back her high school sweetheart Buddy (Patrick Wilson). Patton Oswalt gives a surprisingly great performance as a nerdy man-child, but Theron owns this film. It's bitingly funny with moments of sobering reality, and the moment when Mavis lets loose on these people she despises so much is heartbreaking. Put simply, this is an excellent little film with an outstanding lead performance.

9. THE ARTIST

 

 This French-produced, black-and-white silent film is a fun homage to early Hollywood. Jean Dujardin stars as George Valentin, a silent film star who refuses to adapt to the rise of "talkies" and sees his career go down the drain as a result. He's terrific in the role, as is Berenice Bejo as Peppy Miller, a rising young talkie star who takes pity on Valentin. The black-and-white, full frame cinematography is beautiful, taking full advantage of the lavish production design, and Ludovic Bource's score energizes the film completely. 

8. MARTHA MARCY MAY MARLENE

This art house thriller from first-time writer / director Sean Durkin stars Elizabeth Olsen in her first feature role as Martha, a young woman who, as the film opens, has just escaped from a cult. The film alternates between her time living under charismatic cult leader Patrick (John Hawkes), and her increasing paranoia as she tries to adjust to normal life with her sister (Sarah Polley). Olsen gives an electrifying performance and Hawkes is terrifying despite never raising his voice. Durkin keeps the film extremely atmospheric and it all builds up to an ending that I'm still not entirely sure of. It's not a conventional thriller by any means, but it is an excellent film.

7. THE IDES OF MARCH

Based on the play "Farragut North" by Beau Willamon, this excellent political drama is directed by and co-stars George Clooney as Mike Morris, a presidential candidate in a fight for the democratic nomination. But the film really centers on Stephen Meyer (Ryan Gosling), Morris's junior campaign manager. As the fight for the nomination unfolds, Stephen becomes increasingly embroiled in the dirty underbelly of American politics as the film builds to a showstopping climax. As much as "The Help" is filled with great performances from several leading ladies, "The Ides of March" nearly matches it as Gosling, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti, and Evan Rachel Wood are all excellent.

6. 50 / 50

 

This comedy / drama is based on the true story of Will Reiser, a friend of co-star and producer Seth Rogen who battled cancer in his 20s. It may hit a little too close to home for those whose lives have been touched by cancer, but it's an excellent film that seamlessly blends comedy and drama, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt gives another great performance in the lead role. Angelica Huston is also great in a small role as his mother. If you can handle the subject matter, this is definitely a film worth seeing, one that is both very funny and very sad.

5. SHAME

This devastating portrait of sexual addiction from director Steve McQueen features an electrifying performance from Michael Fassbender as Brandon Sullivan, a thirtysomething New Yorker who is desperately addicted to sexual gratification. Brandon is forced to confront his demons when his sister Sissy (Carey Mulligan) moves in with him, and ultimately finds himself spinning more and more out of control. This is an extremely difficult film to watch, but the artistry on display is masterful. Mulligan is excellent also, and McQueen shows a complete mastery of the very difficult material. This one of the most purely artistic films I've ever seen, and it touches on a very difficult issue that is often covered up in American culture.

4. TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY

This excellent thriller is based on the classic novel by John le Carre and tells the story of an investigation into the presence of a Soviet mole at the top levels of Britain's MI6. Gary Oldman is terrific as George Smiley, the former agent who secretly heads up the investigation, and director Tomas Alfredson creates a moody, bleak atmosphere with bleak, grainy cinematography. This is very much a dialogue-driven film, complete with just enough bursts of shocking violence to keep the film moving along at a slow burn, right up until the final reveal.

3. MIDNIGHT IN PARIS

Woody Allen has been hit-or-miss lately, but with "Midnight in Paris" he has a definite hit. Owen Wilson plays Gil Pender, a struggling screenwriter vacationing in Paris with his fiance Inez (Rachel McAdams). When he goes out late at night in search of inspiration, Gil finds himself transported back in time to Paris in the 1920s, where he meets a host of famous characters including F. Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald (Tom Hiddleston and Alison Pill), Gertrude Stein (Kathy Bates), Salvador Dali (Adrien Brody), and Ernest Hemingway (Corey Stoll in a scene-stealing performance). He also falls in love with the beautiful Adriana (Marion Cotillard). This is definitely a piece of fantasy, but taken in that light it's an effortlessly entertaining film, probably the funniest film of the year. The more you know about literature, the more you'll get out of all of Allen's references, but this is simply one of the year's best, most entertaining films. 

2. DRIVE

This brilliant art house noir from director Nicolas Winding Refn is one of the year's absolute best films, and one of the few that I expect to stand the test of time as a truly great film. It's the story of an unnamed Hollywood stunt driver (Ryan Gosling) who becomes involved with some shady businessmen (Albert Brooks and Ron Perelman), as he slowly falls in love with his neighbor Irene (Carey Mulligan). This is just an utterly brilliant film, with terrific performances, an electrifying score, and beautiful cinematography. There are some thrilling car chases and several sequences of shockingly brutal violence. As I alluded to in my opening, I struggled for a while in determining which of my top two films was the best, and while I've kept "Drive" at number two that doesn't take away from it at all in my mind. 

1. THE DESCENDANTS

Alexander Payne's "The Descendants" is, flat out, the best, most entertaining film of the year. George Clooney gives the best performance of his career as Matt King, a "backup parent" who is forced to confront increasingly painful truths when his wife falls into a come following a boating accident. Shailene Woodley gives a terrific performance in her first film role as Matt's eldest daughter Alex, a wild child who has to catch up on her growing up and help her father out in dealing with things in the wake of her mother's accident. The supporting roles are filled out with excellent character actors including Matthew Lillard, Judy Greer, Beau Bridges, and Robert Forster. The film is based on a book of the same name by Kaui Hart Hemmings, and Payne and his co-writers Nat Faxon and Jim Taylor have created a series of characters that feel completely and utterly human, and a series of situations that feel completely and utterly realistic. The film blends comedy and drama seamlessly and is both hysterically funny and heartbreakingly sad. The Hawaiian setting allows for some gorgeous cinematography and atmospheric music, and the setting plays crucially into multiple themes in the film. All in all, this is just an excellent film. I've seen it three times now and I can confidently say that "The Descendants" is the best film of 2011.

So that's a wrap on 2011. I'll be posting my reactions to the Oscar nominations, which will be announced on Tuesday morning, and I'll have Oscar predictions in the week leading up to the big show and reactions after. At some point I'll post a list of my most anticipated films of 2012, which will hopefully be a great year for movies and will hopefully feature some films that are as great as "The Descendants" and "Drive."

The Film Source 2011 Movie Awards

Here in the first month of 2012, Hollywood is in the midst of its "awards season," the two month period every year when countless organizations, guilds, and critics' groups announce their best of the year awards in numerous film production categories. There is certainly a great amount of prestige in being nominated for, and winning, these awards, but in my many years of following movies I've come to realize that despite all their prestige, these awards--from the People's Choice Awards to the Academy Awards--are really just one group of people's opinions on the best films and performances of the year. So, in the spirit of awards season--the first one since I started this blog--I've decided to post my own personal film awards for 2011 in a handful of categories. These categories are similar to many of the ones recognized by the Academy and the various trade and acting guilds in Hollywood, though I've combined some in the interest of simplicity. I'll also have some honorable mentions in most categories to go along with each winner. I'll begin with animated films, move on to the technical categories, and then on to screenwriting, acting, and direction. So without further ado, here is one amateur critic's opinion of the very best Hollywood had to offer in 2011.

BEST ANIMATED FILM OF THE YEAR:

"RANGO"

 

Animation is a field that has been dominated by Pixar for years now. But this year, director Gore Verbinski (the original "Pirates of the Caribbean" trilogy) has crafted an animated western that holds its own among the better animated films out there. It doesn't reach the level of Pixar's best films ("Wall-E" and the "Toy Story" trilogy in my opinion), but this story of a chameleon lost in the desert who must defend the town of Dirt from a greedy land baron is entertaining, action-packed, and utterly hilarious. It also may be the most visually impressive animated film...ever. Legendary cinematographer Roger Deakins was a visual consultant on the film, and blu-ray.com has hailed it as one of the finest Blu-rays ever produced, thanks largely to its spectacular image and sound quality. This is simply an excellent film all around.

(A warning to parents who haven't seen it: this film isn't for the very young as there is some risque humor as well as some violence and scary scenes that push the boundaries of the PG rating. As a matter of fact, the film's "extended edition," which is available on the Blu-ray, would almost certainly have earned a PG-13).

Honorable Mention

None. "Rango" absolutely dominated this category this year.

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS:

"HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PART 2"

 

"Rise of the Planet of the Apes" seems to be the Oscar frontrunner for visual effects, but while that film did have spectacular motion capture CGI, I found some of the environmental CGI to be lacking. "Harry Potter," on the other hand, simply has spectacular visual effects all around. It's impressive to see the progression of the effects work across the eight films, as the early effects in "Sorcerer's Stone" and "Chamber of Secrets" were pretty poor, but as the franchise became more and more mainstream and the budgets grew, so did the quality of the effects. And in this final chapter, which is really just the third act climax of a four-and-a-half hour epic, the final battle for control of the wizarding world looks utterly spectacular.

Honorable Mention (in alphebetical order)

• "Hugo"
• "Rise of the Planet of the Apes"
• "The Tree of Life"

BEST SOUND:

"EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE"

There may have been films with more impressive sound design from a purely technical standpoint this year. But "Extremely Loud" is unmatched in the way it uses sound to influence the development of its protagonist. Whether the blare of sirens, the rush of a passing subway train, the gentle jingle of a tambourine, or a blared cacophony of noise, we hear the world of post-9/11 New York just as Oskar does, and through this begin to understand a bit more of his eccentric personality.

Honorable Mention

• "Drive"
• "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo"
• "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2"
• "Hugo"
• "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy"
• "The Tree of Life" 

BEST EDITING:

"THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO"

While I thought the story in David Fincher's adaptation of "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" wasn't particularly compelling, there is no denying the filmmaking prowess on display from an acting and technical standpoint. And while editing is so essential to storytelling, that's not where this film suffers. The blending of Lisbeth's and Blomkvist's storylines in the first act, as well as in the moments leading up to the film's climax, is simply excellent and, particularly in the latter instance, really helps build the tension in this extremely atmospheric film.

Honorable Mention

• "Drive"
• "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2"
• "Martha Marcy May Marlene"
• "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy"
• "The Tree of Life"
• "War Horse"

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY:

"THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO"

Another technical recognition for this film as "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo" is simply beautiful to look at. No matter the location--whether the snowy environs of northern Sweden at Christmastime, the warm glow of Martin Vanger's seemingly inviting house, the bleak dinginess of Lisbeth's apartment, or the pulsing neon of a vibrant club in Stockholm--Fincher and cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth have once again crafted a film with an absolutely pristine appearance.

Honorable Mention

• "The Descendants"
• "Drive"
• "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2"
• "Martha Marcy May Marlene"
• "Shame"
• "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy"
• "The Tree of Life"
• "War Horse"

BEST COSTUME AND PRODUCTION DESIGN:

"HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS PART 2"

And another technical award for the "Harry Potter" franchise. Unlike the effects, which have improved with each film, these films have always had spectacular production design and costumes. But this one may have been the most impressive as we see Hogwarts transformed into a war zone--even to the point that we see blood smeared across the floor from the dragging of dead bodies. Production designer Stuart Craig and costume designer Jany Temime have worked on all eight of these films and this one (which is really concurrent with Part 1 as they were shot as one film) may be their best work yet.

Honorable Mention

• "Anonymous"
• "The Artist"
• "The Descendants"
• "The Help"
• "Hugo"
• "Midnight in Paris"
• "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy"
• "War Horse"

BEST MUSIC:

"THE ARTIST"

The Academy only recognizes original scores and songs in their music categories, and their rules are somewhat vague. I've elected to combine the two categories and simply recognize all music within a film, whether instrumental or vocal, original or previously recorded. But even with those rules, there is simply no film this year that used music as effectively as the excellent black-and-white silent film "The Artist." The score plays over virtually the entirety of the 100 minute film and, as with all silent films is absolutely essential in influencing the mood of every scene. Ludovic Bource's work here is simply excellent, and while there were plenty of other films with excellent music this year, none of them could match "The Artist."

Honorable Mention

• "The Descendants"
• "Drive"
• "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo"
• "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2"
• "The Ides of March"
• "The Muppets"
• "War Horse"

BEST SCREENPLAY:

"MIDNIGHT IN PARIS"

This was one of the toughest categories for me to choose a winner in. But Woody Allen's story of a struggling screenwriter who is magically transported back to Paris in the 1920s is simply wonderful. It may not have as many memorable lines of dialogue as some other films this year, or have the difficulty of a nearly silent protagonist, or have the unique nature of a silent screenplay, but "Midnight in Paris" absolutely has one of the best stories of any film released this year.

Honorable Mention

• "The Artist"
• "The Descendants"
• "Drive"
• "50 / 50"
• "Young Adult"

BEST PERFORMANCE BY AN ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE:

SHAILENE WOODLEY IN "THE DESCENDANTS" 

None of the acting categories seem to be overly competitive this year, and while this category in particular could be filled by probably half-a-dozen performances from "The Help," for me, no one was more impressive this year than Shailene Woodley. Starring in her first film, Woodley plays Alex, the daughter of George Clooney's Matt King, a young woman with a troubled wild streak who is forced to catch up on growing up when her mother falls into a coma. Woodley absolutely owns this role with a performance that displays huge emotional range. Torn between rage and sorrow early in the film, Alex matures noticeably during the course of the film, but even as she engages in biting conversations with her father and others, that pain and sorrow is always there, and those emotions come back to the forefront during the film's alternately hilarious and heartwrenching climax. This is simply a fantastic performance from an up and coming young actress, and as with other young discoveries in recent years, I'm very excited to see where Woodley goes from here.

Honorable Mention

• Berenice Bejo in "The Artist"
• Bryce Dallas Howard in "The Help"
• Octavia Spencer in "The Help"
• Carey Mulligan in "Shame"

BEST PERFORMANCE BY AN ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE:

ALBERT BROOKS IN "DRIVE"

This was Albert Brooks's first film performance in eight years, and as shady businessman Bernie Rose, he absolutely owns the role. Bernie is a genuinely likeable guy at first, though clearly he's not someone to be messed with. Though his true colors can be guessed at, it's not until late in the film in two shockingly brutal scenes--one in a diner, the other in a garage--that the nature of his character is revealed. And through it all, Brooks is absolutely excellent, making Bernie one of the rare likeable villains in cinema.

Honorable Mention

• Viggo Mortensen in "A Dangerous Method"
• Max von Sydow in "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close"
• John Hawkes in "Martha Marcy May Marlene"
• Kenneth Branagh in "My Week With Marilyn"
• Jonah Hill in "Moneyball"
• Tom Hardy in "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy"
• Patton Oswalt in "Young Adult"

BEST PERFORMANCE BY AN ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE:

VIOLA DAVIS IN "THE HELP"

This was another tough choice, and it wasn't until seeing "The Help" a second time that I made my decision. While the film shows its flaws more on a repeat viewing, the strength of Davis's performance just grows. As Aibileen, a black Mississippi housemaid in 1963, Davis is simply flawless. While Octavia Spencer's Minnie is the source of much of the film's humor, Aibileen is the driving force of much of the drama, and Davis simply captures this character perfectly. There are countless scenes I could cite, but the one that really struck me on a second viewing was the final confrontation between Aibileen and Hilly (Bryce Dallas Howard), the despicable queen bee of Jackson's young housewives. Davis's delivery in this scene is absolutely perfect (I can imagine full theatre auditoriums cheering at this point), but her closing monologue about forgiving your enemies shortly after this scene is perhaps just as powerful. This is simply a stellar performance from an actress who has been steadily rising in the ranks over the last five years or so, and hopefully this well be the performance that earns Davis her first Academy Award.

Honorable Mention

• Rooney Mara in "The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo"
• Elizabeth Olsen in "Martha Marcy May Marlene"
• Michelle Williams in "My Week With Marilyn"
• Charlize Theron in "Young Adult"

BEST PERFORMANCE BY AN ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE:

MICHAEL FASSBENDER IN "SHAME"

  

Michael Fassbender's performance in "Shame" as Brandon Sullivan, a thirtysomething New Yorker who suffers from a desperate sex addiction, was, for me, the year's most electrifying performance. He captures every nuance of Brandon's character, whether his cool confidence in picking up a woman in a bar, his eyeing of a woman on a subway that is the first clue that there's something off about this guy, his increasing desperation as he descends deeper and deeper into depravity, or his complete emotional collapse when he begins to realize how debilitating his addiction has become and what it has cost him. Fassbender completely gives himself over to this character, and while this is a difficult film to watch, Fassbender is utterly captivating in the role.

Honorable Mention

• Rhys Ifans in "Anonymous"
• Jean Dujardin in "The Artist"
• George Clooney in "The Descendants"
• Gary Oldman in "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy"

BEST DIRECTION:

NICOLAS WINDING REFN FOR "DRIVE"

 

This art house noir about a Hollywood stunt driver who gets involved with some very shady people is one of the year's absolute best films, and while there are many moving parts contributing to the whole, probably the greatest factor is Refn's direction. The cinematic execution is simply excellent on every level, whether in the quiet character moments, the visceral action, or the shockingly brutal violence. I honestly don't have much more to say about this film that I said in my review, or in my top ten article, but suffice to say that "Drive" is simply a spectacular film and I will be eagerly looking forward to whatever Refn does next.

Honorable Mention

• Alexander Payne for "The Descendants"
• Woody Allen for "Midnight in Paris"
• Steve McQueen for "Shame"
• Tomas Alfredson for "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy"

BEST MOTION PICTURE OF THE YEAR:

"THE DESCENDANTS"

 

With my Top Ten Films of 2011 article now completed, I can now add "The Descendants" here. I'll refer you to my list for an evaluation of why that film is at the top, but I will say that it is, without a doubt in my mind, the best film of 2011.

"Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close" Review

I must admit, up until recently, I was not looking forward to "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close." The trailer made the film look like shameless Oscar bait and felt very emotionally manipulative to me. Couple that with the heavy Oscar buzz--undeserved in my mind as no one had seen it--the film was receiving up until about a month ago and it just wasn't a film I was interested in. Then the reviews started coming in, most of them mixed, but there was at least one rave review from a critic I highly respect that got me a little more interested in the film. Eventually I got to the point where I was looking forward to seeing it, and I'm happy to say that my early thoughts about the film were wrong. This is a film that delivers on every level. It's not perfect--I found the ending to be quite sappy for example--but it is nonetheless a fine example of dramatic cinematic execution.

Based on the book by Jonathan Safran Foer, "Extremely Loud" is the story of Oskar Schell (newcomer Thomas Horn), a young boy who may or may not have Asperger's Syndrome ("The tests were inconclusive," he tells one character). Oscar lives in New York City and is suffering emotionally from the loss of his father Thomas (Tom Hanks) on September 11. But when he visits his father's closet for the first time a year after his death and finds a key hidden in a vase, Oskar becomes convinced that this key must lead to some mystery somewhere, and he embarks on a quest across the city in search of what he hopes is some final message from his father.

That all may sound a little sappy, and to be honest that's what I thought at first as well, as this is very similar to the plot description given by Warner Bros. But I'm trying not to give away any spoilery details, and trust me when I say that the story makes sense as it plays out. We see in flashbacks that Thomas often gave Oskar various quests and puzzles to solve, presumably to keep him occupied and channel his clearly hyperactive energy. These moments between Oskar and his father are quite touching as Tom Hanks is perfectly cast in the role. This is the Tom Hanks many will remember from ten or twenty years ago, playing yet another effortlessly likeable character. He doesn't get much screen time as this Oskar's story, but that's not a problem as Thomas Horn is an absolute revelation. He appears in literally every scene in the movie and he completely captures every quirk of Oskar's character. Whether in the playful early scenes with his father, the narrated descriptions of all his apparent oddities (he even refers to himself as odd), or his increasingly heartbreaking emotional outbursts, this is simply a brilliant performance from a young actor who looks to have a great future.

I will say that this is not a film to be taken lightly. The events of 9/11 hover over the film, and in Oskar's interactions with people all over New York, no matter what their personal situations are, when they learn Oskar's story and his connection to what he refers to as "the worst day," we can see how deeply each of them was affected by that terrible tragedy. Politics are wisely avoided, with Oskar simply being unable to understand why people would fly a plane into a building and kill his father. Imagery from the day is fleeting, but it's powerfully used, and there's an extremely heartbreaking conversation between Thomas and his wife Linda (Sandra Bullock) when he's trapped in one of the towers. There are also a series of voicemails left by Thomas that are revealed throughout the film; these scenes are a testament to Hanks's talent as he is able to convey so much emotion in his voice alone. There are also some very emotionally intense moments in Oskar's conversations with various people and overall this is just an emotionally draining film...though not nearly at the level of something like, say, "Schindler's List."

The best thing though is that the emotion and the drama never feel forced...at least until the end. The ending might feel a bit sappy to some, and it was the one real flaw that keeps me from giving the film a perfect rating. But up until that point, the story and the emotions feel completely believable. Maybe Oskar's determination to walk everywhere (he is now afraid of public transportation, among many other things), is a little far fetched, but a scene in which he walks across the Brooklyn Bridge (bridges also scare him, though evidently not as much as subways), is particularly effective. Perhaps everything is so believable because Oskar is such a unique individual. He clearly thinks and sees the world differently than most other people, but that turns out to not be such a bad thing.

I haven't even touched on all the excellent supporting performances from the likes of Max von Sydow, Viola Davis, Jeffrey Wright, and others, but in the interest of avoiding spoilers I'll simply say that all three are particularly effective. The score from Alexandre Desplat is moving, particularly in the emotional moments. Even the sound design is immaculate; in fact the use of sound in this film may have more of an effect in developing Oskar's character than I've seen in any other film, maybe ever. Overall, this is simply an excellent drama that works on almost every level. The Oscar buzz on this film has all but died out, but it's nonetheless absolutely worth seeing for anyone who loves quality cinema or simply a great story.

"Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close" is rated PG-13 for emotional thematic material, some disturbing images, and language.
Running time: 129 minutes.
Released domestically on December 25, 2011, by Warner Bros. Pictures.
3.5 stars out of 4.

"Carnage" Review

"Carnage" is a rather unique film; a black comedy with four speaking parts that takes place entirely in one setting (two if you count the opening and closing credits). Directed by Roman Polanski and based on the play "God of Carnage" by Yasmina Reza (who also wrote the screen adaptation with Polanski), it's a very funny but very dark film.

The film is the story of two sets of parents, Penelope and Michael Longstreet (Jodie Foster and John C. Reilly), and Nancy and Alan Cowan (Kate Winslet and Christoph Waltz). Following a playground altercation in which the Cowans' son Zachary hits the Longstreets' son Ethan with a stick, the four of them meet in the Longstreets' apartment to try and resolve issue. But their meeting quickly deteriorates as it becomes clear that while the playground act may have been one of childishness, the parents may actually have less maturity than their children.

The film is very funny and very dark as I mentioned, and there are lessons that can be taken from it. The acting is excellent and Reza and Polanski do an excellent job at making each of the four characters unique in their personalities so that their actions never feel redundant. Penelope and Michael are relentlessly affable, Nancy is a bit high strung, and Alan is the oddball of the bunch as he is constantly on his Blackberry and shows no interest in the proceedings...that is, until coffee, cobbler, and eventually scotch and cigars are offered. But as the film progresses, each character transforms, at various paces, until they all end up raving lunatics and the whole purpose of the meeting is forgotten. Each of the performances is excellent, with Foster probably standing out the most to me, and Winslet coming on strong with a series of drunken outbursts near the end. The only problem I would say I have with the film is that because it's so brief (a scant 79 minutes), it's hard to say how much has changed in these characters by the end. Also, because of its short duration, it ultimately ends up feeling a bit like a pleasant diversion rather than a fleshed out feature film. It's entertaining enough, but I don't know that I'd recommend a full-priced $10-11 ticket. See it at a matinee and you might feel like your money was better spent.

"Carnage" is rated R for language.
Running time: 79 minutes.
Released domestically on December 16, 2011, by Sony Pictures Classics.
2.5 stars out of 4.

"Mission: Impossible--Ghost Protocol" Review

The latest installment of the "Mission: Impossible" film franchise is yet another satisfying entry in one of the more continuously successful series out there. I've found each of the first three films to be solidly entertaining, and while this one has a bit of a slow start, it ultimately ends up as yet another solid outing for Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) and company.

As far as the story goes, Hunt and his team (Jeremy Renner, Paula Patton, Simon Pegg), are forced to go off the grid when the IMF is implicated in a terrorist plot and the entire organization is disavowed. Rogue scientist / professor Kurt Hendricks (Michael Nyqvist) has stolen a set of Russian nuclear launch codes and hopes to incite nuclear war with the notion that decimating the human population will be good for mankind in the long run. Hunt and his team of course have to stop Hendricks at all costs. The catch though is that because the IMF has been shut down, they have no connection to their bosses back in Washington, and no backup of any kind. 

I'll get the bad out of the way first, and I've alluded to it already: the first 30 minutes of the film did not grab my attention in the least. I found the pre-credits prison break sequence to be a bit underwhelming, and while the traditional "light the match" opening credits--accompanied by Lalo Schifrin's classic theme--are fun, the following sequence which involves Hunt and his team infiltrating the Kremlin I found to be downright boring. I'm not sure what contributed to this, and I intend to see this film in theatres again (because the rest of it is so good), so maybe I'll be more drawn in the second time around. But once unexpected things start happening and Hunt and his team are forced to go rogue, the film definitely amps up and doesn't let up once all the way up through it's thrilling climax. The impressiveness of this series has always been more in the gadgets (though it thankfully never goes for a pre-Daniel Craig James Bond level of gadgetry) and the stunts, rather than in spectacular action sequences...the exception being the John Woo-directed second entry. Stylistically this film is probably most comparable to M:I-3, which probably makes sense since the director of that film, J.J. Abrams, remains a producer on this one. But the scale of the action and stunts is definitely upped here as director Brad Bird--in his first live-action outing following animated hits "The Iron Giant," "The Incredibles," and "Ratatouille"--has come up with some showstopping set pieces, particularly a sequence involving the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, the world's tallest building. This is probably a sequence seen on the biggest screen possible, though as I'm not a fan of IMAX (I think it eliminates the impressiveness of wide-screen for something akin to a giant full-frame television), I wouldn't necessarily recommend that format. I saw the film on a fifty-foot wide screen sitting five rows back and the Burj Khalifa scene definitely gave me a sense of vertigo.

Overall, "Ghost Protocol" is yet another solid entry in the series. The stunts are spectacular, the action is intense, and the gadgetry is fun. This is about all you can ask for from a "Mission: Impossible" film, and this one definitely delivers.

"Mission: Impossible--Ghost Protocol" is rated PG-13 for sequences of intense action and violence.
Running time: 133 minutes.
Released domestically on December 16, 2011, by Paramount Pictures.
3 stars out of 4.